Re: Garbage contents after running autoconf 2.69

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>
Cc: Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Garbage contents after running autoconf 2.69
Date: 2018-12-29 15:36:02
Message-ID: 30511.1546097762@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
> I was just modifying configure.in for another patch, then tried to
> generate the new configure with autoconf on Debian. However I am
> bumping into some noise in the process.

Project practice is to use plain-vanilla autoconf 2.69. Vendor
packages tend to contain various "improvements" that will cause you
to get different results than other committers do. Fortunately
autoconf is pretty trivial to install: grab from the GNU archive,
configure, make, make install should do it.

My habit is to configure with, say, --prefix=/usr/local/autoconf-2.69
and then insert /usr/local/autoconf-2.69/bin in my PATH. This makes
it relatively painless to cope with using different autoconf versions
for different PG branches (though at the moment that's not a thing
to worry about).

> Or is there some specific configuration which can be used
> with autoconf, in which case it would be interesting to document that
> for developers?

Hmm, I thought this was documented somewhere, but I'm not awake
enough to remember where.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2018-12-29 16:39:31 Re: Poor buildfarm coverage of strong-random alternatives
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2018-12-29 15:31:11 Re: Clean up some elog messages and comments for do_pg_stop_backup and do_pg_start_backup